Graham's suggesting flipping the draft around to make it read top down... i.e. move section 4. atom:feed up to be section 2.
I disagree with Graham and think that the draft as it stands is acceptably usable. On the other hand, it might become more so flipped around this way; what do our editors think? -Tim
On Nov 9, 2004, at 8:23 AM, Graham wrote:
An ideal spec layout would be:
2.0 atom:feed
An atom:feed element MUST contain one atom:head element and zero or more atom:entry elements
2.1 atom:head An atom:head element MUST contain the following child elements: - Exactly 1 atom:title element - 1 or more atom:link elements - etc
2.2 atom:entry ditto
3.1 atom:link [general atom:link definition, followed by] In atom:head, atom:link must blah, whereas in atom:entry blah blah
3.2 atom:title ...
3.3 Date Constructs [general date construct def] 3.3.1 atom:updated 3.3.2 atom:published etc
There you go. Note I can code a feed generator just by working through the list in 2.1 and 2.2.
Graham
